This is D's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following D's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
CARB like any bureaucracy, exists only to see that it CONTINUES to exist,and provide sinecures for its non-elected, well paid aristocracy. Chartered to clear California's polluted air, it now serves only one of two states that continues to suffer from air pollution, by the continually tightening measurements of EPA Air Quality. CARB has imposed manufacturing requirements that automakers waste billions to provide as a handful of manufactured products. Monies that could much better be spent elsewhere to accomplish more cleansing. It still has mandates for FCEVs that will cost hundreds of thousands per copy, and require an infrastructure for $ billions more, and are never going to replace working alternatives. Why do we still have two organizations, CARB and EPA, duplicating each others work? One has cleansed 48 states missing only in a couple of counties in Texas. CARB has failed in its one state. It is long past time to pension them off, and close CARB down.
All he auto amkers are improving the ICE engien. There si nohting new here. BMW hand others ahve had varaible vlave lifing for a long time, FCA's MultiAir duplicates all of thsi except for the higher compression operation. Most new designs have cooled EGR too. I await the introduction of HCCI operation that will raise the ICE efficiency to its theoretical maximum. Many of the advanced engine offerings by all the auto makers are getting awfully close tot having all the pre requiste changes and modifications needed to accomplish that HCCI operation. That semi-diesel operation, will afford the diesel's fuel economy along with the substantially reduced weight and improved cleanliness of the Otto cycle engines. The auto makers know how to provide an ICE with a ZEV toxic emission profile matching an EVs emissions, and 25% of California's cars meet it today. The auto makers even suggested it to the regulators, in lieu of unnecessary and IMO stupid CO2 emissions requirements. Only to be double-crossed and to end up with both requirements. No one knows how to modify a diesel for SULEV II cleanliness, even in the lab, never mind the street. However HCCI or a derivative, offers the best of both worlds.
Genuine progress is slow, steady and cumulative. Meanwhile many here think we have accomplished nothing, and the USA s full of polluting gas guzzling dinosaurs.
Here we have a consultant's study the unsurprisingly finds that the ideas proposed by the HH Baker funding source, are perfect. Quelle Surpris !
THe ZEV LEV II Regulations slated to go into effect are fine but duplicative of the EPA's T2B2 tightening. CARB has not succeeeded, yet. If it went out of business tommorow the Air would continue to get cleaner, as older more polluting cars are replaced. You seem to be an EV proponent, as am I, but only when EV technology is ready economically as well. In any case, the ICE actually will do a better job of cleanup under the ZEV mandate (LEV III) for all, as they actually clean the Air as they operate, while EVs do not.
Once again the Politicians have no perspective. I fail to see what all the urgency is. Why must this be pursued on a Crash basis? The USA uses less fuel than it did in he 1990s; and emits less CO2 as well. In Fact the USA has met the targets for Kyoto and even reached the targets for Dr. Hansen's Cassandra warnings, thus accomplishing all the CAGW Cassandras wished. Simply Declare Victory and Quit. It's not like Oil is in any danger of running out. The Peakist nonsense is dead. The abiotic origins of hydrocarbons is becoming the current favored theory among geologists, which also answers the question of why other planets have such huge supplies of hydrocarbons. It also indicates that hydrocarbons are potentially much more common than thought, when the only source was thought to be fossil life.
Roger, I think you have specified the best range extender in the Fiat TwinAir 2 cylinder sub 1.0 liter engine.
There will be little inconvenience, if you can't recharge you BEV because the wind was too low, or it was too cloudy. So simply don't go to work tomorrow and maybe the next day, until the wind blows enough or the sun shines, to provide the energy to recharge your BEV. That is an easy fix for intermittent wind and solar power. Sure Harvey. It's easy. No Problemo...
It amazes me how little science or engineering or even common sense, exists on this blog. You cannot come out ahead by oxidizing carbon, then un-oxidizing it to return to the state previous i.e fuel. A little Law of Thermodynamics called Entropy interferes. Perhaps you have heard that it is more than difficult, rather it is impossible, to build perpetual motion machines? All these efforts constitute un-economic efforts in which you have to add energy, that costs money, to do the process. That will ALWAYS be the case, although there may be political reasons that may seem to neccesitate doing that subsidy.
Thamk you for your commentary. For those who believe with out CARB we would backslide into Chinese pollution, I would say that you must think think the EPA is useless. Fine! Do away with that redundant organization instead. But then who would prevent backsliding in the other 49 states, if not the EPA. You enviros (or perhaps CARBite employees?) forget that the other 48 states, minus CA and Texas, already meet the AIR Quality measures of the EPA, (which are the same as CARB), while Texas and California, in particular, governed by the CARB, do not. So on that objective basis, who has done the better job of regulation? Bureaucratic Redundancy is the issue, not deregulation of Clean Air.
Methods to refine the CI engine's fuel burning have long been primitive, but the times are changing. Shaping and controlling CI ignition and burning rate, will allow the cleanup of toxic emissions at the source. That will allow less intrusive, and expensive, cleanup technologies, downstream. As this technology advances engineers are approaching the benefits of the theoretical HCCI operation, from both the SI, gasoline, and CI, diesel, spectrums. New Diesels engine designs can shrink in weight by almost half, from 500-1000 to 300-500 lbs; and thermal efficiencies of SI engines to rise by 33-50 per cent.
As an Engineer, it has never made sense to me to try to convert masses of vehicles to gaseous operation. It intrinsically, seems simpler and easier, to merely convert gaseous hydrocarbons to liquid fuels. Providing that the energy cost of doing so is not prohibitive, and that the process scales. This may be the process technology that accomplishes the qualifications.
With the adoption of LEV III emissioin regulation when LEVIII is implemented post 2017, ther is no logical reason to continue the CARB, After all what could be cleaner than to require all vehicles to have ZERO emissions, the same as a pure EV, as the LEV III spec does? CARB bureaucrats are offering a change of mission to justify their continued existence and salaries, for post LEV III becoming a GHG agency in 2025. It won't wash. With the completion of the effort to cleanse our AIR there is no need for multiple enforcement agencies. (There is none even now.) The EPA can undertake the small mission to see that the adopted regulations will continue, to ensure no backsliding. Bye Bye CARBite idiots. OTOH there is nothing more permanent that mankind can create, than a government bureaucracy, long after the missions for which it was created no longer exists. Sorry about that, the political drones will probably keep it alive. Long before the 2025 time frame the CARB will have a face down from the auto makers, their dealers, and the auto buying public bring unable to get their cars serviced, over the CARB' arbitrary requirements for automakers to manufacture certain rising quantities of EVs, and FCEVs. I suspect that the CAGW/GHG scare will have run its course, joined Acid rain, Alar, Y2K, and assorted other theoretical scares on the dung heap of History. The effect is turning out to be at most, infinitesimal; and of little concern. Id's advise the CARB to select another horse to ride in its quest to keep drawing paychecks, but these fools have never been noted for their perspicacity.
SJC, They are. It was they who found and developed, the Lithium desert brines of South America. It was their profit motive that closed in their less economic Lithium mines they owned and operated in America and moved production there. Awaiting the day that it would prove profitable to reopen them as they are now doing. Tell me what have your Marxist heroes ever accomplished, other than stealing by taxation the work of others? Simply to provide ill gotten wealth for themselves, while producing nothing of value to anyone else.
No system of mileage estimating can account correctly for all the variances in driving operators, geographical differences, and temperature differences. So all are wrong. They may be useful however, as a relative Figure of Merit when comparing two vehicles using the same estimator, but that is all. But some are more Wrong than others. The worst or most optimistic is the European estimator. The European mileage figures are very unrealistic. Europe's mileage estimator is very optimistic. In the USA there are two mileage estimators in use. The CAFE estimator that is about 35-40% tighter than then European estimator; and the EPA window sticker estimator, which is 15%-20% tighter than CAFE, or almost 50% tighter than the European estimator. In these Press clippings the PR types take the European estimator's highly dubious results, and simply convert to US mpg. Then they compare apples to oranges and criticize vehicles that were measured using a tighter estimator. That is pure Garbage In Garbage Out, statistical lying, that fools no one except the over-schooled but under-educated, non-scientists that post here.(E-P excepted) Probably because it reinforces their disdain for all things American, and the fervent belief that equivalent technology done elsewhere in superior, somehow. Such is not always the case, our emissions technology is superior to any in use elsewhere, and we have been at it much longer. By the time Europe fully implements EU VI, equivalent to T2B9, America will have tightened from current T2B5 to T2B2 for all LDVs. That T2B2 emission level was expressly created to measure the emissions from BEVs. Vehicles that meet T2B2 are classified as ZEVs, or Zero Emission Vehicles, and essentially pollution free. ICE vehicles meeting T2B2, post 2017, will actually be better than EVs, since the ICE acts as an air pump, sucking in dirty air, cleaning it, and exhausting cleaned air into the atmosphere, as it runs. While an EV does no such cleaning activity.
There is no difference in emissions between CA and the Feds, today, the federal implementation schedule having caught up. CA does intend to tighten to SULEV III, equivalent to current T2B2 from T2B5, but the Feds are planning to do so too in the future at about the same time in 2017 or later for both. That level of emissions is equivalent to ZEV battery powered electric cars. Sergio Marchionne has said 2018 may be the "sunset of diesels" here since no one knows how to clean a diesel to that ZEV level of emissions.
You gentlemen are living in your fantasy world. Electricity substituting for fossil fuels may be a good idea if you had the electricity. But at the same time you are arguing for the end of fossil and adopting electricity, you are also arguing against building any more reliable large scale electricity generation made by fossil or fission. t the same time that the present system is aging and surplus reserve margins are demagogued by your political friends to be too high, when they are really at all time lows. Brownouts are becoming inevitable and routine, and will approach Third World reliability. Your Wind and Solar fantasies haven't worked anywhere in the World despite hundreds of billions being forced to be spent to construct these white elephant installations. I hope when the brownouts come you absorb your full fair share of the inconvenience and problems. After a half century of effort, it is a mere few decades until Fusion is ready for full commercialization. That is the time, not now, to pursue your utopian fantasies on how everyone should live. You might actually have a possibility of having some of it come to pass.
The long walk back to sanity with respect to CO2 CAGW hysteria has begun. Europe pursued that and neglected genuine toxic emissions such as NOx and SO2 and CO for far too long while acceeding to the supposed dangers of a trace gas that is plant food.
FCEVs are still an answer to a question nobody asked. There costs stil run inot the hundreds of thousands per copy and show no sign of much improvement . The only reason any one discusses them is because a couple of imbedded ignorant, non-scientific fruitcakes in CARB have the power to mandate them. Costs be be damned.
This is the first advance in Fuel cells in a dozen years. But it is just the glimmer of a technical approach to undertake, and not a completed idea.
Repeal the whole thing. It was based not on Science or economics, but a fear that fossil fuelds were running out. Or that they were controlled by unfriendly nations. Those premises sre no longer ANYWHERE NEAR ACCURATE. The US is well on its way to fossil independence due to new technologies. New discoveries now project reserves into the millenial range. Plus the CO2 CAGW scare has about run its course, just like Acid rain, Alar and Y2K etc. before it. So forget about mandates and let the market decide when the technology is ready, if ever. We certainly don't need a couple of totally unqualified guys like a lawyer and someone with a conflicting financial interest, to decide.
Beauracracy run AMOK! All CAGW catastrophist Paul Hansen wanted to do to save the Planet, is to reduce CO2 emissions to 1990 levels. We are already there in the Western Hemisphere. Now the mindless bureaucrats at CARB, want 80% below that number Why? Are they trying to create the next Ice age? It is time to declare Victory and pension these mindless idiots off...
Long after the the "need" is proven not to exist, and the IPCC's AR 5 is laughed at as scientific pap, the "true believers" esconsed for life in the bureaucracy go on mindlessly creating stupid regulations far afield from its original charter. I fully support taking the toxic Air Quality regulations to the endpoint of any possible further regulation. That is to pristine Air Quality with a T2B2 tightening, or "ZEVs for all vehicles" mandate. Then there is nothing else the EPA needs to do other than to shut itself down. Mission Accomplished. Of course bureaucracies are the only immortal things Man has ever achieved, anywhere. So to kill it will require depriving it of its blood supply of constantly increasing government funding. Finding the political will to do so is almost impossible, requiring politicians to actually, DO something, and divert the funds to solving other needed problems.
Harvey D, More blather with little content. Have you seen the cost over runs in greenie "renewable" projects? Have you seen the wildly optimistic power projections versus reality experiences? (6-15% of nameplate power?) Have you seen the obscene life time estimates for cost justifications of 30 years versus 8 year reality experience? Your axe you grind with, has been pretty well worn down. Construction cost over runs, was a tool we thoughtful nuclear critics used to kill the worst of the poor 70-80 construction efforts. Now the new LWR reactors are much more examples of factory prefabrication of parts, much higher quality, and much more attention to detail, carefully planned construction management, and staying on "schedule". Your Vogtle delay was merely adjusting the starting point, from the NRCs final approval date, from where the NRC said it expected to make a decision; and the final date they finally did, and allowed work to commence. They did so after they over ruled the greenie fool of an NRC director who wanted more studies of the likely hood of a Tsunami wave penetrating 75 miles in from the sea coast. That greenie approved fool of a director never intended to let any project ever gain approval. The NRC is collegial, listened to his every objection, and resolved them, but eventually even they could no longer abide his increasingly inane obstructions. The Chinese are building 8 of these identical Westinghouse AP-1000 semi-passive LWRs of the Generation III+ design. The first one is about finished and fueling in under 5 years of an as planned construction schedule. Compare that with the "monkey wrenched" reactor projects which were delayed into the second or third decade of construction, before being abandoned, unfinished. Vogtle was planned for a 5 year construction schedule and is holding to it.
EPO, Irrelevancis is what I said and what I meant. Yucca Mountain nis in the ring ofmountains surrounding Death Valley. Portions of which do indeed exist as a part of Nevada. Certainly some of these actinides are "fission poisons". That is why reprocessing is done, to create new fuel rods wiht less fission poisons and more fiasile material in htem. bu tas I pointed out, the Frnch choose special locations in the LWR fuel stack for these expressly constructed fission poison fuel rods. They reduce the reactor rate at certain well chosen hot spots, and also serve as sort of control rods. Remember every time a tranuranic Actinide atom absorbs a neutron, while acting as a "fission poison" to an LWR operators point of view, it transmutes itself into something else. Those resultant atoms might be more readily fissionable, or have a dramatically shorter half life. If they remain the same there is no net gain o reducing f residual "highly radioactive long-lived nuclear waste" so found of Greenie demagogy. But in French experience they cut in half the Tranuranics in several reprocessed cycles through the LWR incinerators, imperfect though they be for that job. Thus reducing the total Transuranics from under 1/2 of one %, to under 1/4 of one %. It is a job well worth doing, if and only if you can reprocess. Meanwhile reprocessing spent fuel reclaims the 95% of fissionable U-235 still left in a typical fuel rod. Your commentary about the half lives is a "So what?" the half life in a non reactor is one thing, the life under active neutron bombardment for the nucleus is completely different.